My life has been about victories. I’ve won a lot. I win a lot. I win – when I do something, I win. And even in sports, I always won. I was always a good athlete. And I always won. In golf, I’ve won many club championships. Many, many club championships. And I have people that can play golf great, but they can’t win under pressure.

So I’ve always won.”

Donald Trump

=========

“Donald Trump cannot possibly understand [Geneva] because he has neither the experience, the expertise or the moral compass to grasp it,” Geneva is “a fundamental moral and tactical construct that serves as a foundation for the law of armed conflict, because all wars, including the global war on terror, come to an end.

We as a community of nations need to engage with one another and not be separated by horrible, immoral treatment of one side over another.”

——

Steve Kleinman

air force reserve colonel and an interrogations expert

===

Well. I almost called this “whatever serves your purpose.”It seems like every day we talk about winning and, yet, we don’t really spend a shitload of time talking about how we will go about winning.

Donald J. Trump has made me think a lot, like A LOT, about winning and how you conduct yourself in gaining wins .in light of the fact that not everyone conducts themselves the same.

Ah. Conduct.

Yeah. There are some basic human driven rules which 99% of people have imprinted on their attitudes & beliefs that affect their behavior & conduct, but, beyond that, the way you play the game can be dictated by who you are, where you live, who you are playing against and a variety of emotional <and Maslow> triggers.

Now. Today, in discussing conduct, I am not talking about what you say or being ‘political correct’ <which may be the most bastardized discussed concept in this particular point in history> but rather I am speaking of conduct as things like “well, if they chop off heads and we do not doesn’t that give them an edge … so …” … or … “if they are breaking the rules maybe we should relook at the rules <or how we play despite the rules>.”

Those kind of things.

Now. While Trump is a horrible little man ethically <amoral in fact>, he is bringing to the forefront a topic which should be discussed at a national level all the way down to the kitchen table level. This is a discussion about who we are as a country and the identity of America exceptionalism.

I say that because how you play the game matters <especially with regard to character>.

To be clear. Outcomes do matter, but inevitably you get judged or measured on both the outcome AND how you attained that outcome. With Trump blustering about ‘winning’ — maybe we have lost sight of that.

So let’s discuss the ‘how we play’ part. And, yes, this is a discussion because it is not as simple as playing by the rules versus cheating — surprisingly there is a lot of room in-between those lines.

====

“When people cheat in any arena, they diminish themselves – they threaten their own self-esteem and their relationships with others by undermining the trust they have in their ability to succeed and in their ability to be true.”

Cheryl Hughes

===

I will begin in a less than obvious place … truth & lies <and bullshit>.

Yale philosopher Harry Frankfurt outlined in “On Bullsh*t” that there is a difference between BS-ers and liars:

Liars respect the truth, because they must know what it is in order to effectively conceal it. BS-ers are different, in that “truth” is simply not a useful category to them. Any belief is “true” if it serves, if it is convenient. BS-ers have no coherent theory of evidence or of inference, have no need for such things, are contemptuous of reason. In this sense, they are much more corrupting of discourse than liars.

In other words, in order to win, the “truth”, to a bullshitter, will become whatever serves the purpose. I believe this also bleeds into “rules” <which are a version of truths>. I brought that up because I stated upfront almost everyone of us inevitably gets judged by how we got the win, not just the win and of itself. Therefore, I would suggest while outcomes/wins matter we should understand that how you play the game either diminishes you or increases you as a person.

Yes. In today’s world we actually get judged on both aspects … not just one or the other. This leads me to point out that we then get trapped in a personal tug of war — a ‘win at any cost’ attitude is the ultimate reflection of a “respect is about winning” attitude where there is such an emphasis on ‘the win’ we get pulled one way — away from always playing the game “right” and lets the ‘chips fall as they may’.

This is our wretched tug of war.

Winning is absolutely good, but the true essence of sportsmanship is something more than merely getting the most points on the board.

Getting good grades is important but not if it requires cheating.

Getting a promotion is good but not if you do so at the expense of another person.

This is hard stuff. But, if it helps, remember:

How many people do you respect that whine their way to victory?

How many people do you truly respect who has cut corners or ‘won on some technicality’?

I would suggest the notion that ‘winning is the highest value’ runs counter to most usual definitions of heroism, decency and good character. Think about:

Atticus Finch is the hero of To Kill a Mockingbird even though he loses.

Martin Luther King Jr. is a hero but his true victory, while living, was in the attempt.

Ned Stark in Game of Thrones is a hero even though he gets his head chopped off.

Even in business winning isn’t everything. Integrity matters. Integrity matters in business because every sane business leader knows you cannot win every time and your employees need to be able to seize upon ‘something’ to get up and go after the next “what’s next.”

Think about this in a comparison way, while Trump defends his any-means-necessary approach to winning & making as much money as he can <as if that is the only meaningful measure of business greatness>, I could point out many business people who are far richer than Trump who have played the game within the rules with integrity & dignity.

But while I would love to continue to point out the hollowness of The Donald this is, more importantly, about America.

I would argue that in order to have a better America, and a better world, that thinking about ‘how we play the game’ very quickly becomes a metaphorical and reality ethical exercise.

Uhm. As I typed that I made a note to google ethical game theory:

——————

An ethical game is usually not the kind of game that lets us replay a dichotomy of good and evil and, in worst case, denies us to judge between right and wrong. An ethical game design takes the player seriously as an individual with an ethical reasoning developed appropriate to their age, leaving it up to them to make a decision.

For this reason, an ethical game is also in no way a game that treats its players as »moral infants«. It presents the player with ethical challenges just as it poses motoric, exploratory, strategic or logical challenges. Purely abstract game mechanics can’t create an ethical aspect. Ethical challenges can only be generated through portraying them in the game world (and particularly through the story) – and through the medial interaction of the player with it.

Conversely, however, an ethical challenge can create game mechanics, which are never abstract, but result from the conflict in the player’s mind as a very specific challenge in the game world.

————————

Well. When I read that I immediately thought it paralleled what I believe is what we everyday schmucks do, and face, every frickin’ day. The game of life, and business, constantly adjusts to the skill of the players involved. And as reality adjusts those playing get better and better. And, yet, the constant adjusting also demands the players to improve their skills. That demands work. I say that because, uh oh, that is where “rules” truly get challenged.

Work. Yikes. Rather than put in the work to improve the skills to win … uhm … some players ‘do whatever it takes’ or use ‘whatever serves the purpose’ to win. In other words they ‘park’ ethical reasoning somewhere and focus solely on ‘the win.’

This is America in a nutshell. While Life is lived and challenges are met some players’ ethics get nurtured while other players shelve ethical growth so as not … well … not lose. It is here that I would point out this is exactly what Trump is advocating: not losing’ rather than ‘winning.’

Think about it.

Not losing, as an objective, basically makes winning a morally empty principle. The win itself is the glory … and we spend little focus on how you played the game <because the glory resides in the outcome>.

Let me be clear. This can be an attractive thought to most of us everyday schmucks.

Anyone in today’s world, in the daily & weekly grind focusing on all the challenges facing us and mentally taking each obstacle & challenge and, in addition, permitting each to take on a life of its own … could quite easily begin to think everything was going in the wrong direction … in other words … we were losing <and the wins are difficult to see>.

And that mental ‘loser’ hole gets a little deeper if you believe you have been working hard and ‘playing the game hard’ and doing all the right things the right way. And in that moment … in that hole … in that moment in which you are tired of working so hard and not seeing any clear cut victories, you start edging in to “so what will it take for me/us to finally win” <and get out of his loser hole>.

Uh oh. The slippery slope of ‘how you play the game matters’ looms in front of you.

Let me be absolutely clear on this. It is hard, even for the most principled person, to not think about stepping on this slope. Especially when you have someone like Trump shining a spotlight on your thoughts with regard to the ‘loser hole’ and offering a “let’s start winning” again message <with no rules on how to go about getting the win>.

Anyway. Here is what I think.

Trump has seized a moment and offered a ride on a fairly attractive slippery slope. For years, in our culture, America <society> has been in conflict with regard to winning.

Winning is everything versus everyone is a winner.

Conflict 1:Winners get demonized by their win at any cost attitude <and celebrated to the same time>.

Conflict 2:Participants get demonized by their inability to win <and yet celebrated by the victory in the attempt>.

You cannot, well, win.

This conflict is exacerbated by generational conflict. Conceptually the former <winning is everything> is owned by the older generations and the latter <everyone who participates in the game wins> is owned by the younger generations.

The old see their version of winning being marginalized and at exactly the same time they see overall larger country and economic results lagging <or in their eyes … “the country isgoing the way of the loser shithole”>. Therefore, to those people, anyone who dares reject the rules of their game, especially if they do not win, are double losers because they were not smart enough to “do anything it takes to win because winning is everything” we need to get out of this frickin’ loser shithole we are in.

This is where someone like Trump can look attractive to some people. It is like hiring a new coach who looks like he is someone prepared to defy conventions – this creates some exhilaration in the fan base.

“fuck yeah … it’s about time.”

It signals the arrival of a maverick outsider who is not just going to shake things up, but is prepared to destroy to create.

That sounds good.

Well. It is good as long as it is within the rules of the game and by ‘rules’ I mean the true construct of playing the game <Geneva Convention offers specific rules and, of course, there is something called the Constitution and things called ‘laws’ and every sport organization has codes, rules and penalties> as well as the integrity of playing the game.

I admit. I am a ‘play by the rules guy.’And, I admit, Trump’s attitude irks me as a business guy. Here is what I know from a business guy perspective <and I believe it is relevant to America in general>.

Give me the construct, give me the box to play within, and I can be creative enough WITHIN the box to beat anyone. I wrote this in 2015:

This may sound odd <especially to someone like Trump> but true creativity, innovation and disruption is found within the box and not out of the box. Out of the box is most often impractical, not realistic long term and ultimately pales when placed next to ethical principles.

I would also note that winning within the box is maybe the most satisfying feeling in the world.

In the end.

How you win matters. And changing the rules simply to ‘win’ loses sight of what is really important – not the win itself but the principled effort you took to gain the win.

And if that doesn’t convince you, remember, rules represent:

“a fundamental moral and tactical construct that serves as a foundation for the law of conflict, because all conflict comes to an end. <and you have to live with yourself and what you have done>“

“Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self.”

—–

Cyril Connolly

======================

So.

If you write, your biggest desire is to be read.

If you write, your biggest fear is to be read.

You want to write things that matter but to do so you have to not only take a distinct stand but you also have to inject some of your own distinctness. While you feel best when you put things down on paper that meet that criteria, it is this that leads to your biggest fear — it will be read. Because that is judgement time.

Writing is wandering the ragged diagonal between duty and desire.

Regardless.

I guess in some way we, who write, want people to be pleased, and to pay attention.

Primarily, maybe what is most important is .. as long as you write for yourself and can be pleased by what you write and say you have spoken your mind, well, you are ahead of the game.

Secondarily, if at some point you entertain someone else and happen to stumble across the truth to share and someone sees it, well, consider yourself lucky — it was a good day.

I’ve written over 2400 pieces. I’d be lying if I didn’t say not every day was a good day. That said. The good days are really really good. And that’s why you write.

Salesmen, secretaries, coal miners, beekeepers, sword swallowers, all of us. All the restless hearts of the world, all trying to find a way home.”

—–

Patch Adams

====================

Well. I had all these quotes and I didn’t know what to do with them until I saw the image at the opening of this post: “They say every atom in our bodies was once part of a star. Maybe I’m not leaving maybe I’m going home.”

I have often wondered why many of us are so restless. We seek things, and travel places looking for ‘something’ and dream dreams. This doesn’t mean we don’t enjoy what we have nor does it mean we don’t accept reality. It just means that there is always an undercurrent of change or “what ifs” or “what could be’s” underneath the surface of our Life. At the same time we are sailing through Life seeking some place we can land which we can not only call home, but actually feels like home.

And maybe that is where the line “home is where you hang your hat’ comes into play. In its simplicity it is actually suggesting that it really isn’t your hat that matters it is when you accept that you can be who you are and that ‘who’ is all you can be that you have found home. And while Thérèse was really suggesting that the material world was simply your journey and heaven, or God, is your destination the overall thought is truer than true.

Whether you believe in something bigger than you or simply believe there is something bigger within you, you should seek the stars within you to guide you to it all — not some external place or location which may appear to fulfill some aspect of ‘home.’

Your dreams, wishes and … yes … the starlight to guide you in the darkness of not knowing what to do, where to go and how to get thru whatever it is you are going thru … is all within you.

Your home resides within you.

You are simply looking for a place to … well … place your home that feels right and true. That place is unseen. That place is not really one place <it can actually be many places>.

Here comes the hard part.

Life will not give you any signposts and most of Life will constantly change your direction unseen in the undercurrents of Life.

============

“In the short voyage of a lifetime, we can see the eddies and ripples on the surface, but not the undercurrents changing the main channel of the stream. “

Thomas Mellon

=============

This all suggests you are in control and you are not in control.

Just ponder the fact we often stand upon the deck of our ship admiring the horizon and enjoying the travel & journey only to have some Life undercurrent disrupt our complacency and some version of ‘living Life laziness’ <i.e., if you’re not careful and become actively involved in Life, Life will actively involve itself in your Life>.

This simply reminds us that circumstances beyond our control often disrupt the illusion of what we have, who we are and where we are.

The unseen undercurrent constantly nudges our mind with questions:

What is our purpose?

How can we take control of so many things out of our control?

How do we reconcile the vastness Life offers us … reconcile the bigness that can often appear within reach … and reconcile our desire to be worthy of Life … reconcile it all against the smallness that is us in the roiling sea on which our ship sails?

Will we ever satisfy our dreams for what could be & what we could be?

Meaningful or meaningless?

We struggle with these questions. And all the while we avoid the questions under the guise of “seeking home.’

Ah. Shit.

Suffice it to say, home is not anything physical, it actually resides in the infinite. As a corollary, this would presume if you accept its infiniteness you should be able to see it also has the potential to be infinitely good.

I believe we inherently know this and inherently know that only ‘home’ will truly satisfy us. And that search, that journey, is the satisfaction. I imagine the unfortunate, uncomfortable, truth is the odds are we will never truly find some ‘home’ in which we can live our entire lives.

“People aren’t always what you want them to be. Sometimes they disappoint you or let you down, but you have to give them a chance first.

You can’t just meet someone and expect them to be everything you’re looking for and then be angry when they’re not every hope and aspiration you projected onto them.

It’s foolish to believe that someone will be what you imagine them to be. And sometimes, when you give them a chance, they turn out to be better than you imagined.

Different, but better. “

==

Chloe Rattray

—–

Well. This is about expectations and how having expectations is bad <disappointing> and good <people like to strive toward expectations>.

No matter how cynical you are, or skeptical with regard to whether there is truly ‘good within all’, pretty much everyone expects everyone else to be the best version of who they can be.
The trouble is that our version of your ‘best version’ is … well … ours. Unfortunately, this “ours/you” expectation tends to be a pretty high standard for which the person we are eying at the moment has to meet.

We tend to not only expect people to be ‘like us’ in the ways we consider positive attributes, but then we also attached a wish list of expectations <based on some fairly idealistic thoughts of how people should be .. and how we see ourselves>.

Well. That brings to mind a Marilyn Manson quote:

—-

“Find out what’s really out there.

I never said to be like me, I say be like you and make a difference.

Marilyn Manson

—-

People are rarely what we expect them to be and they are rarely like us. And, frankly, we don’t want them to be like us, we want them to be like … well … them. But this creates the uncomfortable situation in that we then have no clue what to expect.

So what do we do? We fall back on ‘us’ <our bias & attitudes & beliefs> and build our expectations.

This is, frankly, silly if not stupid. We should focus instead on ‘different … but better.’

Me? Over the years I have become significantly better at setting aside expectations of people and permitting them to build what I should expect of them. Even then I have to constantly remind myself that people are less consistent than what I would like <to expect>.

I guess I believe people can change. I say guess because I think we are a little flippant with that thought. Flippant because I think we are more hopeful than reality suggests. Most people really don’t change that much. They may evolve as they grow, but people tend to be the people they were <just maybe a little more here and a little less there>.

And that’s okay.

Now. There is the inconsistency factor. Inconsistency is good in this case albeit confusing to others and makes it difficult to discern ‘what to expect.’

But.

Everyone is inconsistent because Life is inherently inconsistent and therefore we make mistakes. That’s kind of the way it is. If everything was always consistent the odds of us making as many mistakes as we do now would decrease significantly.

Unfortunately everything is not consistent <except in its inconsistency> and therefore, unfortunately, we make a shitload of mistakes.

Oh. And mistakes shape expectations as much as successes do.

Now. This means also means how you handle the mistakes matter in terms of setting expectations for people. If you own up to them, adapt, make some adjustments and move on … well … the mistakes don’t accumulate like a snowball but instead remain individual flakes you meet as you progress and are manageable in their smallness. Frankly, anything less ‘owning up’ is counterproductive, self-serving and carries a hue of non-accountability. I will also note that under the glare of circumstances ‘beyond our control’ <let’s call that Life’s shit> it is certainly aggravating, and sometimes even a little unnerving, when people don’t own up to their mistakes and we waste time & energy flailing about seeking blame.

Whew. Regardless. People aren’t always what we expect.

And, oddly, we get disappointed even if they are actually just a different version of what we said we wanted <expected> and THAT may be a better version <but we are so disappointed we don’t see it>.

Oh. Another thing about having expectations.

There is a really nonsensical thought that is strewn throughout the World Wide Web with regard to ‘have no expectations and you live in the now” … or “have no expectations and you won’t be disappointed.”

What bullshit.

Utter nonsense.

Regardless of the fact our expectations are sometimes misguided and that we far too often judge people on some really out of whack expectations, expectations are part of Life.

They set standards.

When we expect nothing from anyone while we may save ourselves from being disappointed … it comes with a cost. With lower expectations we make less of an effort. We have convinced ourselves that fighting for things that are pretty important in life are no longer worth fighting for as a standard. And while some of our expectations are unrealistic the horizon aspect is almost always “best version of.”

Well.

That is a good expectation. And if you have it, or them, others around you tend to see them, feel them … and absorb some of the pressure to meet them.

Yes. It has been proven over & over again <research> people do better when more is expected of them. I am fairly sure this cause-effect is called the Pygmalion Effect. Study results have shown some consistently significant ‘better’ associated with this effect.

A guy named J. Sterling Livingston is the one who wrote in 1969 about the Pygmalion Effect <named after the mythical sculptor who carves a statue of a woman that is brought to life>.

His title also pays homage to George Bernard Shaw, whose play Pygmalion explores the notion that the way one person treats another can, for better or worse, be transforming.

The influence of one person’s expectations on another’s behavior isn’t a recent discovery. More than half a century ago, Albert Moll concluded from his clinical experience that subjects behaved as they believed they were expected to – “the prophecy causes its own fulfillment”. Livingston states that creating these positive expectations is remarkably difficult but I would argue setting ANY expectations is difficult …. but we should do so.

Expectations challenge the status quo … even if the status quo is good & right.

That’s okay too. Affirmation is often as powerful as change. Accepting the status quo and not making any effort to push ourselves and those we care about to become better is almost like giving up hope for anything better.

Now. Expectations must always pass the test of reality before they can be translated into any real outcomes. Expectations must have more gravitas than the fluffy power of positive thinking or some generalized confidence that ‘it can & will happen.’ People are not motivated to reach for unattainable shit — they need to have some sense of realistic and achievable. Suffice it to say encouraging one to strive for unattainable goals is simply encouraging the eventuality of ‘give up trying’ and ‘settling for results that are lower than they are capable of achieving’.

Regardless. We need to and should have some pretty high expectations of people. All people. And while I know it seems counter intuitive to suggest that we should idealize what people can be, okay, some people, with regard to expectations because it most likely means a shitload of disappointment.

But I remain steadfast in believing we SHOULD have expectations and we SHOULD set the standards high.

Research shows that while we will be disappointed initially the people themselves will be more likely to step up to meet some of the idealized expectations.

Our expectations can drive ‘better.’

The cost? We bear the cost in that we get disappointed. Shit. I will pay that price. It would be selfish to think otherwise.

People will disappoint us with regard to our own expectations.

People will more often surprise us if we are open to a different better version of our expectations.

But all of that is kind of irrelevant. It doesn’t matter how you feel … get over it … it is the objective that matters. Steven Covey said it the best:

===

“Treat a man as he is and he will remain as he is.

Treat a man as he can and should be and he will become as he can and should be.”

Stephen R. Covey

===

Yes. It is foolish to believe someone will be as you imagine they will be.

But go ahead.

Have expectations.

Be prepared to be disappointed and, more often, surprised by something different and better.

So. “Not being owned”sounds like a simple thing. Yet. Over and over <and over> again we permit something … or someones … to own a part of you.

It can be direct or it can be indirect.

It can be consciously or subconsciously.

To be clear.

This is not a society thing <albeit society is a nasty twit on occasion> … this is a self thing.

And this is not a corruption thing <albeit money is a nasty twit on occasion> … this is a self thing.

So what do I mean by a self thing?

One of the very very few things you can actually control in life is “self ownership.”

Owning who you are as a person. Owning your integrity. Owning your character, dignity and moral compass. And, I imagine, owning your behavior & attitudes. These are all things clearly in your control. These are all things, clearly, you own.

Now. This ownership isn’t easy. It isn’t because what you own, well, there are a shitload of people and things and Life are constantly seeking ways to steal it. Yeah. I said steal. They try to wrest all of, well, “you” out of your control so they can steal it and replace it wit something they would prefer (or want).

Please note: I will also say owning a good security system will not do shit for you.

You need to learn self-defense. And by self defense I actually mean defending against your self <and not someone or something else>. You have to choose to fight – that is your choice.

Fight against some nasty instincts <which more often than not head you in the wrong direction>.

Fight against temptation <of which the world has an endless array it constantly parades in front of you>.

Regardless. Many of us flippantly state “I am my own person and nothing owns me”and, yet, under the glaring spotlight of truth & reality we will find that more of us is owned by someone or something than we would like.

So what do we do when that happens?

Many of us shrug our shoulders when faced with this harsh truth and say “those are not the important things” or “that’s just Life.”

Well. Here is some harsh truth you better get a grip on. It is not ‘just Life’ and they are not just ‘little unimportant things.’ It is your Life and they are your things.

More of us should stop, take a moment, and think about whether we want to react to external ownership efforts <stealing> or proactively “fight myself” over the right to own myself. Yeah. Sometimes you not only have to be aware of what you own, you also have to be aware enough to fight your instincts to let them be stolen. Let them? Yes. We do it far too often because its either not important enough in that moment or maybe just too hard to fight at that moment. Be careful. Be careful because those moments can add up fast.

“Most men are individuals no longer so far as their business, its activities, or its moralities are concerned.

They are not units but fractions.”

=

Woodrow Wilson

——

Well.

In business and in Life people like consistency.

We actually like rules. And we really <really> like some guidelines for how to do things, what to say and when things should be done.

Oh. And .we love, yes, LOVE to look to the past for answers or the ‘formula for what to do or how to act.”

Ah. That sneaky ‘learn from the past or be doomed to repeat mistakes’ advice.

True, but not true advice. What makes it not true?

Context.

Future truths, or solutions, only partially reside in the past. The other part lives in the present and what is swirling around that moment.

Which brings me back to the opening quote.

We like to see things as units and yet they are simply fractions. Some people stand on fractions and act like they are whole solid foundations.

Be wary of those people.

They are not really seeking truth just answers, okay, well … maybe just an answer.

——-

“Fear not the path of Truth for the lack of People walking on it.”

Robert F. Kennedy

——-

I admit. The trouble we constantly run into is, yeah, context. We are always contextual, mosaics of the moment, and this is troubling for anyone seeking simple answers. Frankly, most of us would love a simple answer now & then <if not all the time>. But some people thriveon simplicity and black & white.

Please do not read into what I just wrote that these people live a colorless life. Everyone has color and everyone certainly has pieces of light within and without.

====

“We are mosaics. Pieces of light, love, history, stars … glued together with magic and music and words. “

Anita Krizzan

==

All I am suggesting is that magic, or the contextual aspects, in Life creates a certain intangible aspect to everyday situations. And while this intangible thing is a nagging aspect in common everyday life & business … at critical points, let’s call them ‘semi-critical moments or junctures’, the contextual intangible aspect is nerve wracking.

Nerve wracking because we want a simple solution in semi-critical moments. And context demands some complexity. It demands looking at fractions and not the whole. This means we constantly struggle with the fact <the Truth as it were> we, as individuals, businesses, countries and societies, are simply fractions and not the unit.

I would also suggest decisions, business & in life, are simply fractions and not a self-sustaining unit.

Yet, we try and make most of our decisions as if everything is aligned and unmoving — kind of like taking a snapshot and taking action.

Uh oh. This is double trouble.

This means, contextually, whatever action or decision you take or make will be relevant to what was … not what is.

———-

“Only a crisis — actual or perceived — produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around.

That, I believe, is our basic function: to develop alternatives to existing policies, to keep them alive and available until the politically impossible becomes politically inevitable.”

Milton Friedman

————-

In closing out this thought I would like to point out that this thought, while it seems like a stronger Life thought, is maybe even more importantly a business thought. Far far too often in business we ignore the fact each decision is contextual seeking comfort by sitting around saying “let’s look to the past for the answer.” I admit I find it slightly odd because in today’s business world every single mistake or hiccup/interruption in the status quo is labeled a crisis and crises tend to produce real change. We shouldn’t be seeking comfort in the solution but rather an uncomfortable solution which enhances the possibility of comfortable results.

On the other hand. Maybe that is my explanation to the oddity. Because what we label a crisis really isn’t true crisis we tend to just depend on whatever ideas are lying around. And the most typical ideas lying around are “what can we learn from the past.”

If you ever wonder why great decision makers should be paid some inordinate amount of money … reread this. Great decision makers see the past, the present & the future and envision the mosaic better than most of us <certainly I>.

They understand the situation is simply a fraction of what is.

This should also help explain why so many people make incredibly bad decisions.

Every moment, every situation, every success and every failure … is contextual. In fact contextual exists in almost every situation in such a wide vivid mosaic perspective that ‘learning from the past’ almost seems like an inordinate waste of time.

“As with events, so it is with thoughts. When I watch that flowing river pours for a season its streams into me, I see that I am a pensioner; not a cause, but a surprised spectator of this ethereal water.”

—–

Ralph Waldo Emerson

=============

“The sphinx must solve her own riddle. If the whole of history is in one man, it is all explained from individual experience.”

——

Ralph Waldo Emerson

===============

“Comparisons are a shit way of evaluating things.”

—-

Bruce McTague

===========

So.

We LOVE using the past to try and explain shit. Past people, past events, past words and past … well … everything.

When we are faced with something new, or someone new, we immediately start sifting through the scrap heap of the past to start creating some semblance of a jig saw puzzle to explain what we are facing.

There are a number of problems with doing this.

The biggest is that scraps are scraps. Oh. And the scraps used to reside in a completely different context <which is impossible to recreate>. And, yet, we continue to try.

The problem is that in doing so we elect to not judge the present on the merits of the present. We decline to judge a person as they are, the circumstances as they are and the decisions on the merits of what it is. We do this with everyone and everything … how money is spent, decisions we need to make, new people we have met and even leaders. We do it all partially well intended <we want to make sure we make a fair assessment of hat we are seeing & hearing> and partially because simply examining something and stating “this is good” or “this is bad” <or acceptable or unacceptable> seems … well … flimsy.

Comparisons tend to make things look more solid. And, yet, we tend to absolutely suck at creating the proper comparisons. And, that happens for a variety of reasons – also some well-intended and some not so well intended.

I will start with the well intended.

As Emerson once wrote: “our being is descending into us from know not whence.” And we struggle with that truth. It makes us uncomfortable … uhm … no … REALLY uncomfortable. If we don’t know where things descend fromthen we begin to spend an inordinate amount of time trying to find comparisons to do so. this all comes at the expense of judging what is, the beings and such, on the merits of what exists. And this is where the shit hits the fan. We either dip into our own memories or a slew of people start telling us what memories to take a look at <the latter is part of the not so well intended>.

Well.

Here is an unfortunate fact … our memories, which is how we tend to judge and create mental comparisons, are constructive and reconstructive.

============

“Many people believe that memory works like a recording device.

…….. our memory chip ……..

You just record the information, then you call it up and play it back when you want to answer questions or identify images. But decades of work in psychology has shown that this just isn’t true.

Our memories are constructive.

They’re reconstructive.

Memory works a little bit more like a Wikipedia page: You can go in there and change it, but so can other people. “

—

Elizabeth Loftus

==============

“You can ask the universe for all the signs you want, but ultimately, we see what we want to see when we’re ready to see it.”

We desperately want to define things through comparison and continuously ask the universe for signs to show us what we want.

We desperately do so because in the absence of some comparison we would then have to judge what is on the merits of what exists — the good, the bad and the indifferent .

That doesn’t mean a shitload of people around you aren’t gonna try and affect how you will build your comparisons and encourage you to compare in some fairly creative <sometimes absurd> ways.

What do I mean?

I go back to the psychologist Ebbinghaus who studied memory construction <his published essay Über das Gedächtness in 1885> where he realized that memory and recall of continuous passages of prose or verse would be affected differentially by people’s experiences and prior knowledge.

Memory is a snare, pure and simple; it alters, it subtly rearranges the past to fit the present.

Mario Vargas Llosa

What that actually means is that the memory you tap into to create the comparisons you seek are slightly mangled by yourself <in how you remember it> and can be manipulated by devious not so well intended people around you. The Constructive and reconstructive nature of memory:

Memories are distributed; not unitary

“remembering” involves retrieving and reassembling

memories can be revised over time

Reconstruction is filling in “missing details” on the basis of logic, assumptions, what “must have been the case”

More common reasons for forgetting: Lack appropriate retrieval cue = something you attach to a memory, can use to recover it>

Ah. If only we could pull out our brain and use only our own eyes. But, not surprisingly, this is the exact same issue new ideas, “white space” theories, fresh thinking, true <not made up> disruptive people & things face.

All that said. I will point out that something doesn’t have to be truly new to face false comparison challenges … it can simply be a new person in an existing role or a common problem or question just in a different time. Suffice it to say anything new, or any change, is being asked to be defined by the past. And there will never be a lack of people stepping up and suggesting they can define something through a variety of comparisons <many of which you spend more time trying to fend off than is worth the time>.

This is a mistake. This is a fundamental error we make. It assumes what is can somehow be extrapolated by something by what was <the past>. In reality, as I have noted numerous times, I cannot exactly extrapolate the past because I cannot exactly replicate the past … which means <in harsh terms> there is nothing there and nothing from nothing is … uhm … nothing.

Yeah.

Most comparisons end up meaning nothing <although they look like something>.

Yeah.

This means most comparisons we create are just plain and simple false comparisons. Without trying to be flippant with regard to what I believe is a fairly standard operating procedure for people … we need to stop. Stop false comparisons.

It is a trap. And a dangerous trap.

Comparisons normalize that which should not be normalized … just as comparisons can de-normalize that which should be normalized. False comparisons wielded by the devious can construct almost any “normal” you could desire <even if it is hollow & not really normal>.

Anyway.

In today’s world there does seem like there is a lot of crazy shit happening. And in our desire to veer away from the “crazy shit” feeling we seek some comparisons to normalize the situation <thereby calming the ‘crazy shit feeling>.

Just a couple of notes of warning on that.

<a> Finding comparisons, if done well, you can actually be convinced there really isn’t crazy shit happening even though there is truly some crazy shit happening.

As a corollary to <a>,

<b> if there is truly some crazy shit happening there will be no shortage of people ponying up false comparisons trying to convince you that there is no crazy shit happening <and some of them will be quite effective>. The only reason I point out the warning is that there really is some crazy shit happening and we need to stop finding comparisons to make today, and some people, look a little less crazy than it really is.

There you go.

I will end where I began … “Comparisons are a shit way of evaluating things <and people>.” We should invest the energy judging what is, people, ideas and things, based on their present merits not some false comparisons from the past.

“I am a strong person. But every once in a while I would like someone to hold my hand and tell me things are going to be OK. “

=

Unknown

——–

Well.

We so often talk about ‘strong people’ as being these pillars of granite … solid and seamless in moments of need or challenge … unflinching in the face of whatever it is they face. But more often strength is not a solid piece of granite. Shit. Many times its not even anything solid. It may be a shield or a shell … or it may be that the person has the ability to put a strong hand forward … and stop what needs to be stopped. But in all these cases … strength is neither a complete solid wall nor does it not have some weakness … or maybe some fragile aspects in which to balance everything.

———

“It is one thing to be brave in front of others, perhaps for fear of being branded a coward and becoming diminished in their eyes, but another entirely to be brave when there is nobody to witness your courage.

The latter is an elemental bravery, a strength of spirit and character.”

=

John Connolly

———-

Oddly … strength is … well … a paradox <or in some sense a contradiction>. It is about setting unequivocal limits … and yet having no limits. It’s about adapting yet unwavering.

So.

Let me discuss this limit thing for a moment.

Emotionally strong people do not really need constant action and excitement … or even a crisis … to define themselves and their lives. This suggests they naturally just put some limits on things. This is not to suggest that they don’t enjoy excitement in their lives … but they aren’t ‘doing’ junkies.

This means their ‘strength’ is usually defined by some self awareness. Awareness with regard to some character type things <which are embodied in actions and behavior decisions>.

Let’s call these our ‘limits’:

– just don’t do some things

Well.

Suffice it to say we all do things that we don’t enjoy doing … but we should never do things that we don’t want to do.

There is a nuance in that … but an important nuance. The strong self aware understand that nuance … and almost always manage to figure out what they need to do … not at the expense of ‘what they don’t want to do.’

This translates into that when it comes to character defining decisions there is always a line. The line isn’t about what you enjoy doing or what you like or dislike … it is about … well … character. And being able to live with yourself and look in the mirror.

– saying “no”

Suffice it to say … if you can’t say “no,” you will get taken advantage of.
I will not suggest you won’t be taken seriously but I will suggest that if you cannot say no you will forever live on the slippery slope of credibility and trust.

Saying “no” reminds people that they cannot control you … only you control you.

– it’s really about plateaus … not limits

Face it.

There are only plateaus, and they are not meant for you to stay there, but only resting places for someplace beyond. Please note I did not say ‘someplace higher.’

“Up” is overrated.

It is more important to move anywhere <mentally, physically, career, Life> than it is to move ‘upwards.’ I’ve always believed in pushing yourself further and taking on new challenges.

I believe this because I tend to believe there is no such thing as that infamous trite cliché ‘being the best you can be.’ “Best” is a relevant thing … at least to the moment. Maybe it is better said that ‘best’ is contextual.

There is always room for growth and change and new possibilities of being the best you can be.

Anyway.

Strength is tricky. It is partially inbred as an attitude … but it is also forged thru the furnace of Life.

—–

“Sometimes you don’t realise your own strength until you come face to face with your greatest weakness”

=

Susan Gale

——-

And maybe that is why strength is never solid. Because strength is often about weakness. The chinks in your armor define your strength … uhm … not your theoretically solid seamless armor.

Which leads me to my final thoughts.

Strength is nothing more than doing what it takes … with character. In order to be strong we will inevitably embrace some different variations of our self. This naturally happens as we encounter knew things and new ‘weaknesses’ we never knew we had.
Within those variations are some aspects of solidness … but other aspects are adaptable and resilient in their ability to morph to the situation.

And, in the end, I imagine strength in a person can be defined one way:

“As a therapist, let me just say: almost every trauma survivor I’ve ever had has at some point said, ‘But I didn’t have it as bad as some people,’ and then talked about how other types of trauma are worse. Even my most-traumatized, most-abused, most psychologically-injured clients say this.

The ones who were cheated on, abandoned, and neglected say this.

The ones who were in dangerous accidents/disasters say this.

The ones who were horrifyingly sexually abused say this.

The ones who were brutally beaten say this.

The ones who were psychologically tortured for decades say this.

What does that tell you?

That one of the typical side-effects of trauma is to make you believe that you are unworthy of care. Don’t buy into it, because it’s nonsense. It doesn’t matter if someone else had it ‘worse.’

Every person who experiences a trauma deserves to get the attention and care they need to heal from it.”

—

hobbitsaarebas

===================

“It’s true, I suffer a great deal–but do I suffer well? That is the question.”

―

Thérèse de Lisieux

===

“… victimization is a way of attracting sympathy, so rather than emphasize either their strength or inner worth, the aggrieved emphasize their oppression and social marginalization.”

—-

sociologists Bradley Campbell and Jason Manning

============

Whew.

Believing you are unworthy of care.

I call this “victimhood backlash.”

Now.

This is different than feeling unworthy of love, respect or … well … unworthy of something or any of that type of thing.

In fact.

This is actually the exact opposite of a victim mentality.

This is when something truly bad has happened to you <you are a real victim of something> and you look around and say “whew, they are the real victims.” In a real sense this person then constructs an extremely viable narrative to suggest that while they are in a shithole … their shithole is nothing compared to some other people’s shithole.

This is not self deprecation … it is a sincere feeling that what you did or experienced was closer to ordinary rather than extraordinary.

But.

I say this unequivocally … even if someone is shrugging off help or maybe even adamantly opposing the help … a hole is a hole and you need help getting out of holes.

Someone may not think they are worthy of care, or asking for help … but they need it.

Anyway.

I have two thoughts on this ‘believing unworthy of care’.

First.

A hole is a hole.

If you are in a hole, it is a hole.

I have written this before … a shithole is a shithole. We are not in the shithole comparison business. All shitholes are dark, deep and often don’t have a visible ladder to get out of the shithole.

To me?

Horrible is horrible.

A black hole is a black hole.

And while maybe not all holes and abysses are created equal … all seem equally deep, dark & shitty when in one.

This may not be literally true … but figuratively I tend to believe that is how we view it when encountering some shit Life gives us which places us into some dark hole.

Second.

I do not believe that victimhood is some cultural crisis <the sociologists I highlight upfront do suggest that>.

Yeah.

The things for which we can publicly accept the fact we were a victim of has certainly increased. This doesn’t mean more shit, and shitholes, have occurred … it is just that it is now more acceptable to admit them and address them.

Can this get out of whack? Sure.

But a long as someone isn’t creating a shithole and claiming being a victim then .. well … a shithoe is a shithole.

I would suggest that we want people who feel like they are n some shithole because they were a victim of something to speak out regardless of whether an everyday schmuck like me may look at them and say “c’mon, be real, that’s Life” and maybe we should be focusing on how to better address them when they speak out.

We need less pandering and more reality management. We need less judgement and more dialogue.

We need to grow a dialogue culture. Rather than responding to comments or behaviors with less condemnation or judgement and more engagement to engage rather than repel <without increasing victim mentality but rather managing it>.

But we do not want anyone at anytime to believe that they are unworthy of care.

Anyway.

I can almost guarantee almost everyone will either slip into a hole or go crashing into a hole at some point in their Life.

And that person <which means, uhm, everyone> will need help getting out of it.

For if you permit someone to linger too long in the hole … well … the abyss will gaze into them. And inevitably find some dark corner in the mind that they will find a place to live, eat and breathe for years and years to come.

Just accept what I just said without shrugging or thinking “that’s some bad shit.”

<Most> Holes are fine in Life.

They are part of Life.

Regardless of whether the shithole is incredibly shitty or just basic shit they have the same intended conclusion — you just have to make sure you know how to get out of them.

Ah.

Which leads me back to the opening quote.

Someone who believes that they are unworthy of care.

I say that because you can spend a lot of time looking around at other shitholes thinking about how to get other people out of their shitholes … all the while ignoring your own shithole, avoiding finding a way out of our own shithole and, maybe the worst, if you gaze long enough into an abyss … anyone’s abyss … it will gaze into you.

============

“And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you.”

–

<Beyond Good and Evil> Friedrich Nietzsche

==============

Look.

I have had this debate a zillion times … the one where you discuss who has it worse.

Who is going through tougher times.

Who has actually gone through a tougher time.

Maybe even discussing a bad moment in life as horrible, but always discussing ‘horrible’ relative to other horribleness.

And while it is most likely true that, regardless of your situation, someone somewhere has it worse than you do … that thought only seems to offer some false comfort nor does it really offer any solutions.

To me … comparing bad situations is not only not very helpful but it also tends to suggest the wrong thing to me – “my suffering isn’t equal to your suffering.” Which tends to lead to “I don’t believe I am worthy of care.”

Bad. Wrong.

I do not believe we should be in the shithole comparison business.

A shit hole is a shithole and anyone in a shithole is just as worth of care as anyone else in a shithole.

Europeans, in general, have always been nicer acting, better behaving and more ‘refined’ <by degree> than Americans.

<please> Everyone just accept that as a Life truth.

So having a European look on in horror at how an American acts is an ongoing event … since almost the dawn of … well … dawn <of every day>.

But now it is not just Europeans looking on in horror … we, as in you & I, are also looking around dumbfounded by some of the behavior we are seeing in America.

Study after study after study <I just saw another one today> is showing that men are acting more like assholes, white supremacists are acting more like white supremacists, anti-Semites are acting more like anti-Semites, politicians are acting more like caricature politicians, everyone named Homer is acting more like Homer Simpson and, in general, any aspect of our internal asshole in anyone is coming out.

I am certainly not suggesting we should all be studying Emily Posts’s Book of Etiquette but behaving well should be about behaving a little better than absolutely essential and not behaving a little worse than absolutely essential.

Now.

Whether you believe there is a direct relationship or an indirect relationship with Trump … or any relationship I imagine … it is happening at the same time Trump is happening.

Coincidence or correlation? … pick your poison.

There are a couple of things that seem to be happening.

Political correctness backlash.

Political correctness, for all its good intentions, clashed with the natural inability that maybe 90% of people have … an inability to artfully articulate their thoughts.

So let’s say that 90% of that 90% say stupid shit with no bad intentions … this translates into a semi-made up-factoid that almost 80% of all people are getting slammed by political correctness and the majority of them mean nothing bad … they just suck at articulating their thoughts.

Sure. Many of those people will attempt to get better at articulating what they feel & think … but, in general, this means a shitload of well-meaning people harbor some bad feelings toward not being able to just talk the way they talk.

And then … well … along comes Donald J. Trump … a 70 year old man who sometimes talks like a junior high school bully and sometimes talks like the well-meaning guy at the bar <although he is certainly not well meaning> who has ‘one too many’. A significant portion of us think “whew, finally, an excuse to say all the things I just want to say without having to weigh every word I say.”

There is nothing inherently bad about saying what you are thinking.

But.

Inherent is what I just shared is … well … you start behaving a little more like an asshole <behaving badly>.

Think of this as the puppy set off the leash. The leash gave them some freedom but, once off, they go wild with no boundaries … in general being a boisterous puppy and being the unbounded happy assholeish puppy … at least for a while.

At some point they recognize maybe not that the leash was good but that the leash kept them closer to their owner and some of their assholeish puppiness isn’t received as well as they were sure it would be received – and they start going back toward the leash holder and maybe curbing their puppiness a little bit.

My point is the asshole factor has increased but I imagine at some point it will revert back a little closer to what political correctness suggested was a good thing <at least one could hope>.

The fly in this ointment is Trump. He has no leash, has never been on a leash and … in fact … seems to believe leashes are inherently bad.

He is not exactly a great role model for puppies <or people>.

I am pissed because it seems everyone else gets a break and I do not.

Trump only views the world as winners & losers, i.e., if you don’t win you are a loser. Well. What this does is encourage all of us to think of the world as a simplistic fight over limited resources where the other guy/gal is competing for your share. In other words you lose if they win.

Now.

If you believe this … or this thought even bleeds into your consciousness on occasion … well … you start behaving a little more like an asshole <behaving badly>.

I am certainly not blaming Trump for all our increased bad behavior but he is certainly an enabler with the whole win or be a loser mindset.

He embodies a toxic resentment toward everyone who has something he believes is his – and this attitude bleeds into how he views America. Germany, NATO, China, Mexico, whomever … all has shit that should be ours. Money, trade, power, etc. him his rightful place in the world.

Symbolically <to those who claim he has a racist muscle> … this is quite like the resentment of an old white man who believes everything is infringing upon his ability to access the pride, power & pay that rightfully belongs to him.

Just like my puppy on a leash example … this is like a puppy who grows up alone but realizes that going to the puppy playground is a shitload more fun … and even more fun if you behave well.

The fly in this ointment is Trump. he doesn’t want to play with other puppies, he hates the puppy playground and says … well … puppies are losers … I want to be a lion or the leader of the wolf pack <and fuck whatever female wolf I want whenever I want>.

Trump treats everyone outside his immediate family members as people who are out to deny him not only from what he wants but also what he believes belongs to him <this attitude bleeds into how he views America and other counties>. This is not exactly a great role model for anyone who is not part of a rich powerful family <and I could argue it isn’t a good role model even for them>.

He is not a particularly good role model if we want to encourage the belief the country is a team which needs to work together, make some sacrifices for the other team members so that the team benefits <and will never go 365-0 in a season>.

Ok.

Look.

We all have flaws and the system, society and institutions are flawed. But just because it is flawed doesn’t mean an asshole president should suddenly set a new bar for behavior that is so low it makes a guy’s junior high school locker room actually appear slightly dignified.

But I imagine my point is that the bar for acceptable good behavior has dropped significantly. Studies show it. Shit. Just watch the people around you or watch some tv and you will actually see it.

Anyway.

I think we all know that Life isn’t just solely about winning and losing. I think we all know that some basic good behavior isn’t something that needs to be dictated but rather it is simply something good for common humanity within a population with a desire to have better things and do better things than we are doing today.

I think we all know that behaving, at least relatively so the majority of the time, well has a reward that may not always show up in pride, power & pay but rather in dignity, honor & … well … certainty.

Yeah.

Certainty.

Good behavior by the bulk of a population tends to lead people to a certainty that society will treat them more fairly, institutions will treat them more fairly and the world, in general, will treat them more fairly … because we can become more certain we will be less screwed more often because people will behave less badly more often <plus … we are happier this way>.

In the end.

I do believe we are behaving more badly.

And while I have the studies and I have the research I don’t really need them. I can just turn on the TV and watch a president who behaves more badly than the majority of the typical high school student. With this kind of role model why wouldn’t a significant portion of the citizenry believe they could behave more badly than they had been behaving the day before?

Suffice it to say that if everyone took one step backwards in their behavior, given the wide spectrum of current behavior from good to heinous, it just doesn’t paint a pretty picture.

We are acting more like assholes every day.

Even the people who are trying to stand up against the assholes.

If I didn’t want to be that harsh I could have said “it appears our level of courteous behavior toward each other is declining” but I didn’t … because research is clearly showing our inner asshole is becoming our outer asshole behavior.

I believe we are better than this <and I also believe the average American is better, behaviorwise, than our so-called President>.

We will get through this and I tend to believe in the end we will end up in a better place.

But, boy oh boy, the level of our general discourse and behavior has surely declined significantly lately and I cannot wait for it to begin improving.

As I stated upfront … I am certainly not suggesting we should all be studying Emily Posts’s Book of Etiquette … but behaving well should be about behaving a little better than absolutely essential and not a little worse than absolutely essential.